GolfOscarDelta From India, joined Feb 2008, 169 posts, RR: 0 Posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3524 times:
So looks like the NAL RTA-70 which was supposed to be a high wing turboprop has now morphed into a low wing regional jet.
The 70-100 seater market space seems to be getting crowded with new entrants
With BBD struggling for orders and SSJ not doing too well either and the MRJ barely getting orders why are more players trying to get into this already crowded market thats already been sewn up by Embraer pretty much? It doesn't even look like the margin on these airplanes is high and unless they sell them like FMCGs they won't even make a dime on them.
Anyway here's the reason I started this topic, looks like some more info has come out on the Indian Regional Jet/NAL-NCA/RTA-70/Whatever they call it 2 months from now: http://www.nal.res.in/pdf/nca-2011.pdf
From the cross section already one can see that the width is lesser than the E-Jets, dunno if this is the final drawing though so it might change. So what do you guys think?
LAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 47
Reply 1, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3458 times:
Quoting GolfOscarDelta (Thread starter): From the cross section already one can see that the width is lesser than the E-Jets, dunno if this is the final drawing though so it might change. So what do you guys think?
It has about the same wingspan as the E190 but a much reduced range relative to the std. E190 version. It is hard to tell if it is going to be significantly lighter than E190 given its shorter length and narrower width.
I hope NAL goes for a joint venture with one of the other players rather than starting a brand new program.
Aesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6843 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 3297 times:
Aside from the Cseries, all the others exist more to help the industry of their country than anything else (which is also how the CRJ, ERJ, and of course A300, came to life). Which doesn't mean they can't make a good airplane, but I wouldn't count too much on the Chinese and Indian offerings, a little more on the Russian and Japanese ones.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
SchorschNG From Germany, joined Sep 2010, 501 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2993 times:
Interesting to note that they are opting for a lower cruise Mach number, but still keep ceiling and wing planform the same.
The magical 25% emission reduction will not come from just flying slower but only if one tries to get the transonic jet out of the airframe. Then again, why not go turboprop?
The range is more a requirement than a performance parameter. Look at India and see, that more than the 2500km are not necessary to connect any two cities in India.
From a structural standpoint, passengers are the worst possible payload. [Michael Chun-Yung Niu]
AirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2022 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2846 times:
There could be a real marker for a new prop, but no let's build yet another regional jet instead. I imagine politicians insisting "propeller planes are old fashioned, we need a jet to show we are a modern country" etc.
Quoting GolfOscarDelta (Thread starter): The 70-100 seater market space seems to be getting crowded with new entrants
Not forgetting Rekkof of course
it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
comorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4903 posts, RR: 16
Reply 6, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2786 times:
What is the point of this project?
I could see something like this in the 70's as a way to seed an industry, but it's 2011 and the GOI needs to focus on basic infrastructure. India's prosperity will be short- lived unless there is a serious effort to invest in sanitation, education, power and surface transportation. India does not need a public-sector aircraft maker just because money is sloshing around.
GolfOscarDelta From India, joined Feb 2008, 169 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2679 times:
Quoting comorin (Reply 6): India's prosperity will be short- lived unless there is a serious effort to invest in sanitation, education, power and surface transportation. India does not need a public-sector aircraft maker just because money is sloshing around.
With all due respect I disagree with that. There are a lot of private sector guys stepping into the Indian market now viz. Mahindra, Tata, L&T, Godrej etc. Sure NAL/HAL may not make a commercially viable product but it serves as a breeding ground for the engineers who will move on to the private sector with actual experience and do well there. India right now does not have a Boeing or an Airbus or even a Cirrus where engineers can get some real experience building airplanes for that matter. At this point in time funding NAL/HAL/ADA/ADE/GTRE is more like funding a study ground for engineers to keep the future aerospace private sector alive. It goes back to the whole
Quoting comorin (Reply 6): I could see something like this in the 70's as a way to seed an industry
the 70's was not the right time to seed an aerospace industry especially considering the restrictive licence raj and the lack of private sector players. The time to seed is now, 20 years from now if they are still trying to seed it then I think you can say definitely that they are wasting money.
YTZ From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 2209 posts, RR: 24
Reply 8, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2572 times:
This is more RJ than small mainline. It won't compete with the E190/E195 or the CSeries. Those two airplanes are bigger and have substantially more range.
Really, I can't see this airplane selling all that well outside of India. But that's okay. I'm sure sales in India alone would be sufficient. That said, even for the Indian market, a really advanced 90 seat turboprop would have been very useful, and possibly garnered lots of international sales. I can't see this being as popular as a turboprop. This thing's got range on par with a Q400. Yet, it won't be as cheap to operate.
Tangowhisky From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 931 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2427 times:
Not to rain on their ambitions, but this is easier said than done. They have no experience building an aircraft of this magnitude. I understand that they have space programs, but it is all about learning something new in building a world class commercial airliner form the get go. I have great respect for India, but they have a long way to go before this plane is ready to fly, let alone production.
Newark727 From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 1367 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2397 times:
Is there really so little room left in the market for anything smaller? I get the vague sense that upward fuel prices and rapid growth in certain countries such as India has left most operators clamoring for bigger planes, but this number of 70-100 seaters is starting to get hard to keep track of.
JoyA380B747 From India, joined Mar 2005, 554 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (3 years 8 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 2287 times:
According to my novice opinion, The NCA will mostly be useful in the air service in the remote North Eastern states of India on one hand, and the growing traffic flow in the ultra-short haul routes of the South states on the other. Expect Paramount airways to also use these in the future, will make good for an all business class flight between the major cities
If it wasn't for AI and those money mongers sitting in the parliament, 9W would have been as big as SQ...:(